1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to planning of multi-year, multi-resource programs to generate a networked program schedule for, for example, an event-based Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule (IMP/IMS) approach, and more specifically to a web-based system and method for collaborative planning of a networked program schedule.
2. Description of the Related Art
Techniques for planning large multi-million dollar projects vary from industry-to-industry as well as within industries from project-to-project. Over the years, several planning approaches and strategies have been developed and implemented. The event-based Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule (IMP/IMS) approach has emerged as a preferred technique for planning large Department of Defense (DOD) projects.
Event-based scheduling is a top-down technique based on planning towards major project events. The key framework for event based planning is described in the Integrated Master Plan (IMP). An IMP identifies the hierarchy and sequence of key events that function as contractual and management guideposts for the project. It is indentured to three hierarchical levels. These three levels are defined as the top level being an event, followed by a significant accomplishment, and ending with accomplishment criteria. This indentured listing becomes the backbone or framework for the entire program. A level zero is used for basic program and administrative definition. The Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) uses the framework of the IMP as its structure to define, sequence and link the detail tasks that must be performed to accomplish the goals of the program. The IMS is the detail schedule of the program.
The creation of a program IMP typically follows a process whereby key program Events are first defined and ordered at level 1 of the program. These Events are typically defined as major review points in the program that determine the readiness of the project to proceed to the next phase of the program. Some example events for a DOD project could be Contract Go Ahead, Requirements Review, Preliminary Design Complete, Critical Design Complete, Production Readiness Review, etc.
After program Events have been defined, Program Significant Accomplishments are defined for each Event. Program Significant Accomplishments should answer the question “in order to proceed into this Event, what should be accomplished?” Some example Significant Accomplishments for an Event such as “Requirements Review” would be Requirements Definition Completed, Requirements Documentation Complete, Requirements Flow-down Complete, etc. The Significant Accomplishments define level 2 of the IMP.
For each Significant Accomplishment Criteria must be defined in level 3 to complete the outline of the IMP. Criteria answer the question “What evidence do I have that this Significant Accomplishment has been achieved?” The Criteria are the artifacts or products that are necessary to meet the intent of the Significant Accomplishment. Some example “Criteria” for a Significant Accomplishment such as Requirements Documentation Complete would be Requirements Document Peer Review, Requirements Document Approval Signatures, Requirements Document Formal Release, etc.
Some program planning activities are performed by giving all the team leads (or program planners) a stack of ‘stickies’ and a pen. They are instructed to begin writing activities that need to be accomplished on the program on the sticky, than place the sticky on the wall in the general order of when the activity on the sticky will be performed. Sometimes programs will then string yarn from sticky-to-sticky to designate the order and linkage of the stickies (predecessor/successor). Once completed this “networked program schedule” is transferred from the stickies and yarn into a software planning tool such as Microsoft Project. Given the linked data MS Project generates the networked program schedule or IMS in the form of, for example, a Gantt Chart. In the instances where MS Project is used as the sole planning tool, the program team leads (or program planners) will sit in a room where the MS Project initial schedule (this initial schedule may have from 1 to 50 lines/tasks) is projected on the-wall and everyone in the room suggests new tasks to be placed in the schedule. A single program manager will enter and modify the program data as suggestions are made.
The sticky approach lacks integrity of task definition and links. Plus it's difficult to document. Often members will take a photograph of the wall and later attempt to key the data into a scheduling system like MS Project. The MS Project only approach is laborious and slow. One task is added at a time with the whole room sitting and watching the development of the schedule. In general these ad hoc techniques make it expensive to develop an IMP/IMS, can produce poor quality in the form of poorly managed, inadequate or unrealistic IMP/IMS. The planning process is highly variable, labor intensive and iterative.